Article deletions in wikipedia

From time to time the wikipedia admins remove articles from their database,
often without any rational reason, but only because of their twisted
policies.

The problem is that many if not most of wikipedia's admins live in the
illusion that wikipedia should be a "serious" encyclopedia, rivaling book
encyclopedias such as Encyclopedia Britannica or such, and thus they have
formed these sets of policies which they often impose in a rather irrational
way.

Now, don't get me wrong. When I say that wikipedia is not a "serious
encyclopedia" I'm not using this as a negative expression in any way.
In fact, in my opinion it's good that wikipedia is not a
"serious encyclopedia". Thanks to that you can often find information and
facts from wikipedia which you would never find eg. in Encyclopedia Britannica.
For example, let's assume that you want to know what "l33t" means, or let's
assume you want to know what is the name of the final boss in Legend of
Zelda: Ocarina of Time. This is the kind of information which you won't
find in Encyclopedia Britannica (because it's a "serious" encyclopedia) but
which you can find in wikipedia if you need to. This is why wikipedia is
sometimes more useful than any "serious" encyclopedia.

Or let's say you want to know what "Toki Pona" is. You would more probably
find this information in wikipedia rather than in Encyclopedia Britannica...
if wikipedia admins had not removed this article. The removal of
such article is beyond comprehension. Who does it hurt to have such an
article? It doesn't offend anyone and it just states a fact. What's wrong
in keeping it? Who benefits from this removal? Nobody.

In my opinion wikipedia should be a database of facts, not an encyclopedia.
The difference is that in the former any fact is ok. There's no
reason to delete any facts just because they are "too unencyclopedic" or
because they are "not notable enough". A fact is a fact, no matter how
notable, and any fact may be useful for someone.